Revisiting the Missing Link: An Ecological Theory of Money for a Regenerative Economy
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Dear authors,
I found the topic very interesting, but I do not think this study has scientific connotations but rather popular ones.
You have not respected the guidelines that the journal has indicated to its authors. In my opinion, the paper also lacks the structure of a scientific paper.
good luck
Author Response
Dear reviewer,
thank you for taking the time to read and review our work.
Following your feedback we've upload and updated the structure of the paper following the Journal guidelines, added a short methodological section clarifying our transdisciplinary literature review, english-proofed the manuscript and improved some of our key arguments and references.
Looking forward to hearing from you.
All the best,
Reviewer 2 Report
I think this is an interesting topic and has pivotal importance in unleashing the revisit and update the ‘missing link’ between money and sustainability by proposing new ontological avenues and reviewing the design elements and the detrimental processes built into the existing system. However, I think the following comments will make it better and more robust.
Abstract: Title, Keywords are clear and relevant.
Introduction
This section is almost well-written. I would encourage you to extend it with COVID-19 pandemic state. For example:
*Please add one or two paragraphs on the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on a regenerative economy. Therefore, I think more elaboration is needed to explain the COVID-19 pandemic impact in the introduction part.
* The researcher(s) should pay attention to the research gap that is still not sufficient. Therefore, please add more arguments related to the research gap in the introduction.
Literature review
The literature review was prepared very well. Yet, part "2. New developments for an Ecological Monetary Theory" are too long. Therefore, please try to restructure by only giving short information.
Conclusion
This section is well-developed. However, to obtain more links with the future literature, I would encourage considering as future study's also some further research on the link the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on a regenerative economy.
Author Response
Dear reviewer,
thank you for taking the time to read and comment on our manuscript.
As suggested in your comments we've included reference to COVID-19 in the introduction and conclusion, taking it as potentially relevant landscape shock for monetary reform and sustainability re-alignment. We found the paper from Ranjbari et al (2021, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.126660) to be quite an interesting and relevant read.
We've also added some short input regarding future research avenues in the last sections and in the conclusion.
Finally, we english-proofed the manuscript for punctuation, grammar and flow. We took this opportunity to have a deeper review of "New Developments for an Ecological Monetary Theory" to make it shorter and an easier read.
We hope to have addressed your comments with this changes.
Thank you once again and we are looking forward to hear again from you.
Regenerative regards,
Reviewer 3 Report
The manuscript entitled “Revisiting the Missing link: an ecological theory of money for a regenerative economy” (sustainability-1650914) was aimed at revisiting and updating the ‘missing link’ between money and sustainability by proposing new ontological avenues. Moreover, the design elements and the detrimental processes built into the existing system were critically reviewed.
The authors' manuscript is a high-quality contribution to the field and I congratulate the authors for their work. I propose refining the manuscript based on the following suggestions:
(1) The research design was not clearly presented and I propose the authors elaborate a section dedicated to explaining the methodological ground of their research.
(2) The discussion regarding cryptocurrencies should be further expanded. The promotion of 'sustainable cryptocurrencies' does not seem to be a viable solution since they do not fundamentally address the five detrimental processes identified by the authors. However, it would be interesting to further discuss the vulnerabilities of 'sustainable cryptocurrencies' and propose solutions for negative impacts mitigation. Under what circumstances would 'sustainable cryptocurrencies' fit into a regenerative economy?
(3) Although not addressed in the manuscript, I believe it would add even more value to the paper if the authors could discuss the economic effects of Russia's invasion over Ukraine at macroeconomic level. If considered optimal, I suggest this aspect to be approached in relation with its negative impacts on the transition towards a regenerative economy, based on the criteria defined the authors.
(4) In the Conclusions section, please consider elaborating one more paragraph dedicated to explaining the limitations of the current research avenue, as well as proposing future research directions.
(5) I kindly ask the authors to carefully proofread the revised manuscript before resubmitting, because I noticed few English language errors.
(6) The manuscript was not formatted according to the Sustainability template and MDPI formatting standards. Please revise your manuscript according to the specifications here: https://www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability/instructions
Author Response
Dear reviewer,
thank you for taking the time to read and comment on our manuscript.
As suggested we have:
1) Uploaded and updated the manuscript to the Journal template;
2) English-proofed the manuscript for punctuation, grammar and readbility;
3) Added a short methodological section;
4) Added some insights for future research in the last section and conclusion;
5) Added a few short sentences on the potential impacts of COVID-19 pandemic as a landscape shock that can re-open space for monetary reform and sustainability re-alignment following another reviewer's comments and Ranjbari et al. (2021) paper;
6) At this moment, we consider that it is too early to speculate on the impact that the recent events in Ukraine might have in the International Monetary System and its reform or re-alignment. However, this is a situation we are following closely and might be included in future research;
7) Regarding the topic of "sustainable cryptocurrencies": in the manuscript we present different crypto niche innovations and separate between 'green', 'sustainable' and 'regenerative' crypto currencies. We do not consider crypto to be inherently unsustainable and provide examples - Ven, Seeds - of projects that might play a role in the overall transformation of the monetary system. Although blockchain-based currencies carry an enormous ecological footprint there are plenty of initiatives that we believe will change that pretty fast (https://cryptoclimate.org/). We've added some small remarks following your comment, however, we feel that a deeper discussion or comparion should be the subject of another paper.
Thank you very much and we're lookng forward to hear back from you.
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Dear colleagues,
In the light of what is written in the methodology, I identify an important critical issue, namely, the study's replicability. Google Scholar is a search engine.
Did you not use databases such as Scopus, WoS or Dimension?
Using your keywords (on Scopus):
ecological monetary theory
monetary transition
money and sustainability
money and regeneration".
I only found "Ecological Economics" with 25 papers. I could not find any contribution in the journal Sustainability and the International Journal of Complementary Currencies Research. But the following contributions are present:
Economic Modelling
Show preview for(24)
Voprosy Ekonomiki
Show preview for(22)
Journal Of Comparative Economics
Show preview for(19)
Ekonomicky Casopis
Show preview for(17)
Economics Of Transition
Show preview for(16)
Applied Economics
Show preview for(15)
Journal Of Economic Dynamics And Control
Show preview for(15)
IMF Staff Papers
Show preview for(14)
Eastern European Economics
Show preview for(13)
Economic Systems
Show preview for(13)
Empirical Economics
Show preview for(13)
Post Communist Economies
Show preview for(13)
Finance And Development
Show preview for(12)
Journal Of Macroeconomics
Show preview for(12)
Macroeconomic Dynamics
Show preview for(12)
Journal Of Banking And Finance
Show preview for(11)
Journal Of International Money And Finance
Show preview for(11)
Journal Of Policy Modeling
Show preview for(11)
Economic Change And Restructuring
Show preview for(10)
Economics Of Planning
Show preview for(10)
Emerging Markets Finance And Trade
Show preview for(10)
Open Economies Review
Show preview for(9)
Politicka Ekonomie
Show preview for(9)
European Economic Review
Show preview for(8)
International Review Of Economics And Finance
Show preview for(8)
Journal Of Cleaner Production
Show preview for(8)
Studies In Nonlinear Dynamics And Econometrics
Show preview for(8)
Ekonomski Pregled
Show preview for(7)
Intereconomics
Show preview for(7)
Quarterly Review Of Economics And Finance
Show preview for(7)
Revue D Etudes Comparatives Est Ouest
Show preview for(7)
World Development
Show preview for(7)
Acta Oeconomica
Show preview for(6)
Applied Financial Economics
Show preview for(6)
International Journal Of Finance And Economics
Show preview for(6)
Journal Of Asian Economics
Show preview for(6)
Journal Of International Economics
Show preview for(6)
…..
Not having considered all these journals, I do not believe the paper demonstrates adequate coverage of the literature.
Reviewer 3 Report
The authors have improved the quality of their manuscript according to the suggestions. Consequently, I recommend it for publication in Sustainability.
